Windows 10 October 2018 Update rollout now paused
-
I always refer to the version number, because that can be found on any device easily with one command. If I need more info, then I refer to the build and revision numbers.
-
I always refer to the previous update as A18U, I don't use numbers (nor will I use them) and to this update I have always called it O18U (and I will continue to do so), without numbers.
But both of those names have numbers in them. I do not understand what you mean. If you say A18U without numbers then you call the update AU? Who but you even understands that AU means version 1803?
-
This is build's "Name"

Everything else is just confusion.
-
-
This is build's "Name"

Everything else is just confusion.
I agree, but the YYMM designation is best followed by the build .XXX(XX)
Microsoft also have this incorrect because people see a fraction (not me, but others have commented)
e.g. 17763.55 is higher than 17763.107 and they also go into 4 and 5 digits, each one tripping over the next
there's plenty wrong at Redmond not least the naming conventions. Flies in the face of software convention from time immemorial.
But then, Windows 1 0.17763.107 would be better, making all versions alpha.
-
I agree, but the YYMM designation is best followed by the build .XXX(XX)
Microsoft also have this incorrect because people see a fraction (not me, but others have commented)
e.g. 17763.55 is higher than 17763.107 and they also go into 4 and 5 digits, each one tripping over the next
there's plenty wrong at Redmond not least the naming conventions. Flies in the face of software convention from time immemorial.
But then, Windows 1 0.17763.107 would be better, making all versions alpha.

Trick is to see not as numbers but merely numerals.
-
-
I agree, but the YYMM designation is best followed by the build .XXX(XX)
Microsoft also have this incorrect because people see a fraction (not me, but others have commented)
e.g. 17763.55 is higher than 17763.107 and they also go into 4 and 5 digits, each one tripping over the next
there's plenty wrong at Redmond not least the naming conventions. Flies in the face of software convention from time immemorial.
But then, Windows 1 0.17763.107 would be better, making all versions alpha.

I don.t think they look at it like decimals. so 107 >55 .
-
Trick is to see not as numbers but merely numerals.
Dashes instead of dots would be less confusing. Maybe
-
Trick is to see not as numbers but merely numerals.
@CountMike
Now you´ve got me really confused
I´m currently running this version 1809 without expiry date

I think actual current "normal" release is still 1803 -- so I'm confused as to what I'm running on this computer now --it's obviously not the current insider build of 1809 as that expires in Dec and certainly not the standard 1803 build I'm running on other machines.
Really confused now by Ms -- I'm sure I'm not the only one. I do take loads of backups so restoring won't be a problem.
Cheers
jimbo
-
I don.t think they look at it like decimals. so 107 >55 .
Ancedotal responses. People I talk to have found the numbering system confusing, maybe not to those realising the significance.
-
@
CountMike
Now you´ve got me really confused
I´m currently running this version 1809 without expiry date
I think actual current "normal" release is still 1803 -- so I'm confused as to what I'm running on this computer now --it's obviously not the current insider build of 1809 as that expires in Dec and certainly not the standard 1803 build I'm running on other machines.
Really confused now by Ms -- I'm sure I'm not the only one. I do take loads of backups so restoring won't be a problem.
Cheers
jimbo
You must have the "Paused" 1809 and not even with last update (107)